Minutes of May 21, 2009 Meeting

1. Bulk Deposits Update

Food Policy Institute is interested in depositing. We are looking to set up a meeting. DIMACS (Center for Discrete
Mathematics and Theoretical Computer Science) will do a large deposit of over 800 papers. Center for Cultural Analysis
wants to deposit approximately posters covering the history of the center. They are seeking funding to digitize the
posters. Center for Women's Leadership also has a posters project.

Other candidates for bulk deposit that have interesting collections include Heldrich Center for Workforce Development,
Camden Law, Peter Still papers. Special Collections Is proceeding with the digitization of between 300 and 600 out of
copyright New Jerseyana.

The World Languages Lab wants to deposit their learning modules, which are a kind of thesis project with various media
excerpts for language learning. There are several issues with this that need to be discussed. RUCore is designed as a
research repository, not an archive of teaching material. Projects of that type are possible, but we have not set a
policy addressing this material. Also, there is the potential for many copyright problems with the media excerpts. This
project needs to be investigated further.

2. E-Journal Development

Linda and Ryan developed a more detailed cost model of e-journal development, which was discussed. Other issues that
need to be considered are the costs of journal archiving through LOCKSS or other methods, long-term preservation.
Regularizing journal agreements and creating a community of editors for self-support are the kinds of steps that will
reduce overhead over time. RUL needs to decide what e-journals mean to us. We need to produce first class journals for
the long-term. Some comparisons to our peers would be helpful. The next steps will be a presentation to cabinet and the
identification of one or two additional pilot journals to be produced over the next year, which hopefully will flesh out
additional properties of the e-journal platform (illustrations, datasets).

3. Policies and criteria for digital projects

The previous work of the Digital Repository Review Committee was discussed, but there was agreement that the libraries
are in a very different place in terms of development, and their criteria are not applicable in the same way. We are
currently digitizing material in three categories. First, Special Collections has its own stream of digitized items.
They handle the prioritization. Second, small amounts (such as documents of 200 pages or less) are digitized for faculty
on request. These requests typically come in through liaisons. The third category, large collections, are where the
questions are. We need to decide if we are actively soliciting large collections. We do not have extra resources to
handle these, so either funding or labor must be provided by whoever is interested in these kinds of projects.